Keeble v. Hickeringill
England and Wales High Court of Justice
11 East 574, 103 Eng. Rep. 1127 [report date 1809] (1701)
- Written by Dennis Chong, JD
Facts
Keeble (plaintiff) owned land where he set up a decoy pond, which he used for the lawful purpose of luring wildfowl to his property. Keeble took the wildfowl as part of a profit-making venture. Hickeringill (defendant) had a decoy pond of his own. On three separate occasions, Hickeringill, from his own property, fired off guns near Keeble’s pond for purposes of scaring away the wildfowl that had gathered there. Keeble sued for damages resulting from Hickeringill’s actions. The lower court found in favor of Keeble and awarded him damages for the disturbances. Hickeringill moved the King’s Bench for arrest of judgment, arguing that Keeble never had possession of the birds.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Holt, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
